3022 (2019) User Reviews

Missed opportunity

[victronix01-180-707110 · 5/10 · 23 November 2019]

It had a lot of potential but was wasted on stupid plot decisions.

The premise was great, the actors were great, the potential was there, and they basically blew it. They tried to recoup it by making it mainly about the man and the woman getting back together after all that time, that really it is about relationships, but it was ultimately a big let down. On the most simplistic level, we did not even get to see them hug or cry together or anything, just the looks of shock, apparently to be artsy. Come on!

Instead of making the situation with the additional 3 crew into the usual story of the battle to decide who will die - so predictable - they could have made the rest of the film about the journey to Europa and getting there and finding out that other crew had survived from other places, etc.

I think there was a major flaw in the plot and that it must have been changed midway through, since the story starts with the idea of the creation of a habitable world on Europa and then retracts to just Pangea Station and no one ever even sees Europa. It sounds like they felt they couldn't manage the story of going to Europa, somehow, and cut it off - I suppose its cheaper set wise to never leave the station. But they sacrificed the film ultimately then, for the small amount of creativity to have had the characters move past just the two people and their own relationship, which was never fathomable anyway.

Finally, I have more faith in humanity that if faced with an inevitable end of the human race, not everyone will melt down into a monster except for 2 people. The stupid predictable ploy of the haunted house space station where everyone has to kill everyone else really tanks films at this point. We've seen that so many times and it's so 2nd grade to just retreat to that. I'd rather they never had the other 3 appear if they have to turn it into that.

Omar Epps is good BUT chain smoking on a space station. As if

[lopezpatricia-06139 · 3/10 · 22 January 2021]

Where and when would you be allowed to smoke on a space craft / station. Ooh the oxygen is on rations, well let's all smoke and waste the little we have. Everyone smoked. By my calculations for a 10yr mission they would have had to have crates of cigs in yr luggage. I couldn't get past it. Even in the future you wouldn't have an astronaut who smoked. Much less a whole crew.

So dark you can't see what's going on!

[lovethesun · 4/10 · 28 April 2020]

I for one am getting sick and tired of movies being produced that you are missing half of what's going on because you can't see. I made it about 3/4 of the way through this but I was so annoyed by the darkness that I gave up.

Not worth watching

[kerrydunn · 1/10 · 22 December 2019]

Right from the beginning. Plagued with bad writing throughout a lame story, it is (probably) supposed to be a "study of the effects of long term deep space exposure on the human psyche" or some such nonsense.

The long, silent opening sequence was meant to fast-forward the viewers through the first 5 years. In 2190, a 4 person crew start a 10 year mission on a space station in deep space near a colony that is on one of Jupiter's moons (Europa). The station is supposed to be some kind of "refuelling" stop for people travelling between Earth and the colony (though they don't explain that or show anyone coming anywhere near them in the first 5 years).

5 years later the captain is losing his marbles and the crew doctor is ready to scrub the mission and have them all sent home for psychological reasons. Then the "event" happens (conveniently of course).

The station is (mysteriously) damaged and a crew member dies. Then the doctor decides to take a one way space walk. The remaining (2) crew try to save him by extending a mechanical arm towards him. Naturally, just as its within reach the Doc decides he wants to live - and as he reaches to grab the mechanical arm, the last section of it - just - falls - off, drifting off into space along with the Doc.

Then, just as the last 2 crew members are about to take some kind of suicide pill - literally about to put them in their mouths - miraculously they spot a shuttle drifting outside the station. Inside they find 3 crew who had been on the International Space Station orbiting Earth and find out that the "event" was actually the Earth exploding for some unknown reason. Despite being right next to it, apparently they weren't as damaged as the space station that was hundreds of millions of miles away from the explosion. Their shuttle was damaged but still somehow made it to the station.

(More plot holes. The shuttle crew are revived and told that there was enough life support to keep them all alive until the shuttle can be repaired and they can fly to Europa. So what do they do ? Have a party. Smoking and drinking. Without explaining what had happened until the next day (because of course, why would you bother mentioning some trivial detail like how you watched the Earth explode from 400(ish) kms away).

Then they find out that the station, which had enough life support to keep 4(+) people going for 10(+) years, will only support 2 people for 3 years. Or 5 people for 1 month. (But apparently there's enough cigarettes to keep everyone going forever !) And supposedly the shuttle (now) can't be fixed at all !

One thing leads to another and the damaged station ends up broken into 2 parts and apparently each half has enough life support to last 1 person indefinitely. Good thing too as each of the last 2 from the original station crew are in different parts of the station and the 3 from the shuttle are dead.

And somehow, despite the "unfixable" shuttle being damaged even further in the explosion that broke the station apart, the captain is able to repair it and - roughly 22 years after the station broke apart - in the year 3022 he is able to pilot it and literally fly straight to the other half of the station (despite not having any communication with it the entire time and no way to calculate where it may have drifted to in the preceding 22+ years). And, naturally, his partner is still alive.

The movie ends with the 2 crew members reunited on the one half of the station, drifting off into space. The same 2 who, 27 years earlier, were going to kill themselves back when things seemed hopeless. Somehow I don't think there'll be a sequel where some intrepid explorer finds them still drifting through space - and still alive.

(Did I mention that during this whole time - they had NO communication with the colony on Europa who apparently couldn't be bothered to check on them or try to figure out why they couldn't communicate with Earth either.)

The entire movie was poorly lit (perhaps to disguise cheap sets). The plot holes were big enough to fly planets through. The story line was lame.

The acting was OK. I only watched it to the end to see what they'd do with the last 2 (you knew he'd find her, somehow, and that she'd still be alive, somehow, but I wanted to see what happened after that). Nothing.

And literally everyone smokes ! On space ships/stations in deep space 180+ years in the future !

I mean WTF ! Why is it that half the space movies I see these days have crews smoking like chimneys ? NOBODY SMOKES IN SPACE morons ! Not now and sure as **** not 170 years from now (let alone even further in the future for some movies).

Blame that on the poor scripting and directing as well..

I would not recommend this to anyone unless you are on a very long flight where you can't sleep and there are no other choices. Even then I'd suggest watching something else. Or reading the in-flight magazine. Or the Emergency card. Or count the hairs on the back of the head of the person sitting in front of you.

Time to let go

[nogodnomasters · 3/10 · 16 January 2020]

First off, the film takes place in the year 2190 and never 3022. Plot Spoiler 3022 refers to the number of days John Laine was captain of the ship Pangea. I found it confusing. The entire film takes place on a four-person refueling station located between Earth and Europa One. John is having mental issues after being out there for five years or the ten-year assignment. The medical officer recommends he return to Earth, killing everyone's career. Then something happens. Comet? They lose all contact with Earth and the ship has mechanical issues too.

All happening inside the ship, occasional spacesuit jump. People bicker back and forth until the numbers are crunched when they realize how much longer they could survive with fewer people.

I liked "ARQ" more. This science fiction was too much character-based and not enough sci-fi plot. It was how do you come to terms with being the last people alive with not much time to live? "Aniara" had better characters and at least more of them.

Guide: F-word. No sex or nudity.

Good cast. Bad everything else. Avoid it.

[gazzalodi · 2/10 · 25 March 2020]

I liked the cast interactions when they weren't struggling with the shoddier parts (as in 95% of it) of the story. I really wasn't sure what the motivation for anyone was other than the mom who wanted to see her daughter... that she blew out and left on earth five years ago, but hey, take what the script gives you. I guess the director came in every day with "Okay this is where you are at on your crazy level today."

And what was with the life countdown clocks? 91 percent then 55 percent. The computer knows when each is going to die? The ridiculous escape pod scene with the computer counting down how long to station collapse. Of course it reaches 1 and then, whew, the door closes and it's all better now. Golly instafix by plot armor is awsome!

I guess Netflix bought this one so when they show one of their crappy home made movies they can always point at this one and say. "Hey it's not as bad as 3022 is it?"

Seriously do yourself a favor and pass this one up. Even if you are the last person on half a space station with your girlfriend on the other half.

Great acting, Smoking in Space!?

[markatkinson-55145 · 4/10 · 10 January 2020]

Brilliant premise for a film BUT. Even with some robust parts, these mofos are smoking and complaining about life support failing... is it 1950?!

Great story concept, poor screenplay execution. I struggled to stay awake

[Top_Dawg_Critic · 3/10 · 25 November 2019]

A whole lot of nothing over something. 91 minutes a soap opera drama that should have been a 20 min short film. Acting was decent, especially Epps, and directing ok, but this is amateur writer Ryan Binaco's first screenplay, and it was atrocious. All over the place, convoluted, extended and unnecessary scenes... a 5th grader could've written it better. I get filmmakers have to start somewhere, but at least have a seasoned writer have a look at it and make the many edits it needed. Great story concept, poor screenplay execution. Sadly, it's only a 3/10 from me.

Worth a watch

[droze01 · 6/10 · 24 November 2019]

This isn't a bad film, but viewers shouldn't go into it expecting action. I thought it was an interesting look at how people might respond to tragedy and being isolated for long periods.

could have been a good movie

[tezzahols · 3/10 · 22 November 2019]

Just finished watching the movie, only reason i watched to the end was to see how it ended, i could have turned it of after 30 minutes. 4 astronauts on a refuelling ship get stranded after earth explodes, sounds like it could be a good story, wrong, the crew are more like a bunch of office workers than trained astronauts, going to pieces easily, smoking on a space station???, must be sponsored by the tobacco industry, the movie jumps scenes and leaves you feeling like you don't care what happens to them. the special effects are good, camera work and props are good, but the movie falls flat because of the script but not as weird as Ad Astra at least

Great move (slow burn)

[ezicat · 9/10 · 19 September 2020]

I loved the realism of the movie - the way humans can disintegrate, and make the most illogical of decisions when faced with catastrophe. It takes the "what if" space disaster movie premise to its extreme. It also questions what it takes to survive; to keep going, and how we react when what we take for granted, or what we love is, taken away from us.

Not too shabby

[prcook-01758 · 6/10 · 22 November 2019]

Different than your usual space thrill fest. It's simple a 'lost at see/last man standing' kind of plot but it moves along well. The acting is above average and the camera, lighting & sound are all solid. This isn't a multi-million dollar Hollywood blockbuster but it is an enjoyable piece of independent cinema with a sci-fi flavour.

Average 90s like Sci-fi thriller ..Average..Not the worst.

[stylegamer · 5/10 · 23 November 2019]

I will give it a average score for some decent commendable performance by the actors. Some deep space travellers get stranded in space after Earth mysteriously vaporises. Though having a cliched storyline in the the similar vein of movies like Sunshine ( 2007) and Event Horizon (1996), the suspense is decently maintained throughout the duration of the film. Well , do not just go in expecting Ridley" scott's Alien and u will be fine.

Despite the flawed first half, the second half picks u some juice . Overall could have been a better movie if there was better set design and production values. The special effects and props so are reminiscent of the 1990s that u will feel a dash of nostalgia . The story could have been better as the element of unpredictability is missing. The film falls flat in its script, plays more like family drama in space. My only gripe is that there is not enough Scifi-ness going on as u would find in movies in this genre.

Lifeless just like space!

[omendata · 3/10 · 5 March 2020]

The one thing that completely destroys this movies credibility within the first few minutes is the smoking of cigarettes on a space craft laden no doubt with Hydrogen and Oxygen, where does the polluted air go - utter nonsense - whoever wrote this travesty has not got a clue about the Sci-Fi genre or the technical realities of life in space.

Sadly that is what destroys this film from the off - terrible script and story that has been done to death before and this film gives us nothing new!

Dreary , boring and lifeless. I wanted to switch off within the first 15 mins but made it to the end in the hope it would get better - sadly not!

Dark SciFi frustrating

[alrichards1 · 3/10 · 19 April 2020]

It's incredibly frustrating to follow the story when you can only see 20% of what's happening on screen. Low light sets to me = low budget special effects. We have LED lights now. I'd go crazy too if I had to live in a dark space station. And smoking? Really?

Smoking? Seriously?

[shoppsi · 2/10 · 23 March 2020]

All they do is smoke. Literally all they do. I wanted to like this so much but I couldn't get past the utmost stupidity of Smoking on a space station, especially when they're short of oxygen. None of the characters acted like astronauts; they acted like idiots. Too bad, as I really like the actors. I did laugh out loud when Kate Walsh's character said, "I don't know; I'm not a doctor" as I'm used to seeing her play Addison Montgomery, lol.

Minimum-effort storytelling. Again.

[BLAlley · 2/10 · 26 November 2019]

I knew I wasn't going to enjoy this movie when I realized the expository text at the beginning was very poorly written. I'm pretty sure Humankind didn't construct Jupiter's third moon. If they meant it's near the third moon of Jupiter, are they suggesting Europa is the third moon? That's not right no matter how you classify them. Then we get some pretentious shots of people doing something, followed by a low-res 3D shuttle flying to a space station, apparently to attend a funeral judging by the depressing music. When we finally see the station we are told, again, the station is between Earth and Europa One, but is clearly in Earth orbit. It doesn't appear any research (or God forbid math) was performed since the size and angular velocity of the habitation rings isn't close to being accurate for the Centripetal Acceleration depicted. Also, why are the solar arrays rotating and never angled to maximize exposure? After some shots inside we see the exterior and are shown another card repeating the date, but this time with the Anno Domini incorrectly added after the date instead of before. Next is a boring montage advancing year by year from one to five (told via cards), ending with some mildly interesting images followed by the title (3022). When we return to the story another card again tells us it's "year Five", followed by another card that says 'Year Unknown". Really? Smoking on a space station? Stop getting your technical data from other movies or trying to be Alien! No one smokes in space. Ever. From there the writing continues to make no sense and the editing is choppy. Significant events happen off screen while boring shots of nothing linger as the crew falls apart for no reason. This movie is an incoherent mess that feels as though they went into production with only an outline or rough first draft of the script.

Confusing mess

[rhodeosc · 1/10 · 23 March 2020]

This entire movie was a confusing mess. It was so hard to watch, because I had no clue what was going on. Terrible script for a terrible movie.

Interesting Build; Lackluster Finish

[iquine · 6/10 · 23 March 2020]

(Flash Review)

Five years into a ten year mission four people are stationed at a space station named Pangea and dealing with the mental effects the distant isolation. When something unexpectedly terrible happens to Earth, will that destabilize their already fragile mental states or will they rally together to make it to an outpost planet named Europa? This had an appropriately gloomy and dank atmosphere to echo their mental condition; perhaps a bit much for a critical space station? Why is the space station so grimy, dark and grungy? Why are the characters chain smoking? Please don't fall into the Prometheus zone with idiotic characters! Ha! There are a few intriguing events that occur, perhaps not enough even to sustain the 90 minute run-time but the longer this film went the more interest I lost as the story intrigue gets a bit more amateurish. It did a nice job hiding it's small budget. It's worth a viewing.

A sci-fi film for people who don't know or care about sci-fi

[ijdavidson · 2/10 · 15 October 2020]

Director John Suits said, "I was attracted to this story because of the huge stakes and scale and because it's ultimately a very intimate human story. Ryan Binaco, the writer, is incredibly gifted and was able to write a script that felt emotionally honest." Well, Binaco may (or may not) be able to write an emotionally honest film, but when it comes to spaceflight realism, Suits and Binaco are hopelessly clueless.

The year is 2190. Earth's first space colony is on Jupiter's moon Europa. So they just skipped the Moon and Mars and went straight for Europa? The space station Pangea refuels ships bound for Europa. What kind of fuel? Nuclear? Storage batteries? Where do they keep it? Because the station's far too small to store fuel. If it's liquid fuel, where does it come from? Earth? So space missions have to come out to Pangea to deliver fuel and then turn around and go home? There are far easier ways to get a manned space mission out to Europa than stopping for gas. And if you still wanted to refuel spaceships, then you'd put Pangea station on an asteroid and mine the asteroid for the raw materials with which to manufacture fuel.

Both Earth and Jupiter orbit the Sun in elliptical paths; the distance between them changes constantly: From closest approach at 365 million miles to maximum separation 601 million miles. So where IS Pangea, anyway? Does it orbit the Sun? A Lagrange point? It seems to be out in the middle of absolutely nowhere. The station would be lined up with both Earth and Jupiter only for a couple of weeks a year. Or is it in a solar orbit that keeps it always the same distance from Jupiter? Earth is visible to the naked eye from Pangea. So it must be awfully close to Earth. Why do you need a refueling station that close to Earth for ships going out to Jupiter? To any station far enough out there to serve as a refueling stop, Earth would be invisible without a telescope.

Rotating crews from different countries maintain Pangea in 10-year shifts. Four American astronauts arrive to begin their term: Captain John Laine, engineer Jackie Miller, doctor Richard Valin, and Lisa Brown. Would you REALLY select crew members like Jackie, a loving mother who is LEAVING BEHIND her 10-year-old daughter on Earth, or Richard, a loving husband who is LEAVING BEHIND his wife? Where are these crew members' priorities? Ten days, maybe, ten weeks, even ten months; but ten YEARS?

Pangea consists of two Stations, each of which is a rotating ring to create artificial gravity. But the rings rotate far too slowly to provide Earth's 1-G gravity. You'd expect that it would be about the same as the Moon, i.e., about 1/6-G. But it doesn't really matter, because a space shuttle docked to Pangea also has gravity although it shouldn't, and then later on, after the two Stations have been separated (to allow oxygen supplies aboard one Station to replenish adequately), Station Two is found, adrift in space and not rotating, but there is STILL GRAVITY aboard.

With each passing year, the crew, amicable at first, drifts apart. By the fifth year, isolation takes a toll. There are tired old shopworn physical correlates of the psychological toll: Laine having annoying and totally uncompelling facial twitches and Miller has some minor and equally uncompelling tremors of the right hand. Laine also experiences night terrors. Valin is forced to deem the crew mentally unfit to continue the mission. As the crew comes to terms with failing their mission, shock-waves from a massive explosion damage Pangea. It's Earth exploding from some ground-based experiment gone awry; exactly what will never be known. We see the explosion through the eyes of someone on the International Space Station. The explosion is far too fast; to explode completely like that would take many minutes or even hours. And the ISS is only damaged, which is also ridiculous. The shock-waves were felt out at Pangea; an explosion like that would have obliterated everything around the Earth, including, most likely, the Moon. Fragments of the Earth, from small to asteroid-size, would be blown out into the solar system and travel for years, either hitting other planets and moons or being knocked completely out of the solar system.

Eventually, Miller and Laine are the only two people left. When the Station is separated (using timed charges), Miller is accidentally stuck on Station Two. Station Two drifts away into space. Laine then alters the mission of Pangea from fuel station to a search for Station Two. How is he going to do that? Pangea isn't a spaceship, it's a space station. It can't maneuver in space under its own power. But no matter; the film has already committed so many goofs that what's one more? And what do you know, 3 years later, he DOES find it. And what do you know, Miller is aboard and STILL ALIVE. And although Laine has gone all gray, Miller still has a full head of completely red hair, with not one single strand of gray. At that point, the film doesn't so much end as just stops. John Suits also said, "I hope people engage with the film in a way where they ask themselves, 'If I were in this scenario, what would I do?'" Well, most of the time, the characters' motivations and behavior did NOT ring true to me.

Concerning the acting: Omar Epps and Kate Walsh have decent chemistry, but nothing special. Why they cast Jorja Fox as a Frenchwoman I'll never understand: I don't speak French, but even I can tell her accent is atrocious. Is France short of actresses?

In summary, this is a "relationship" movie poorly disguised as a sci-fi movie. If you prefer movies that are more about relationships and don't care that the entire premise of the film is ludicrous, maybe you'll like it.

Not bad on a quiet night

[thales-63045 · 8/10 · 28 October 2022]

Let's start by saying the space agency that employed these people and did the astronauts psych tests need sacked. The Right Stuff? The non-existent stuff more like. It seems all the other nations managed their 10 years but the US half way through their term start to frost and fall apart. Was the writer telling us something? Anyhoo the premise of the story is good, the acting is very good (in my opinion) the cinematography is average and the script is good. Science Fiction though? Nah!! It's more a psychological thriller set in space. Like Event Horizon was a horror story set in space. That's it. Not much else to say.

Slow moving Sunshine extremely light

[shide_85 · 6/10 · 24 November 2020]

In Short Low to mid buget movie that lends from 2 other movies mainly; Sunshine (2007) and Event Horizon (1997). Due to the budget the CGI isn't aced and neither is the staging always good. The writing is allright thought with alot of logical misses and scientific inaccuracies. This movie does not try to function within established scientific borders. The acting is what you will remember this for, the full cast makes well above ancticipated performances and Omar Epps delivers a pretty much aced performance. The smoking advertising is disturbing though, possibly the only way to finance the movie - act and give others cancer or not to act, that is the question..?

Pro's Acting Alot of bang for the buck Some effect - the space station cgi

Con's Smoking in space Huge logical gaps Detracting staging and cgi at times

To clear out the name: At one point he mentions the 3022 - it is the time spent on the station at that point in time 3022 days - this plays in in keeping the viewer guessing if what you are shown is his disillusions, if the whole thing is the scientific test they are there for or if it is their reality.

Boring, uneventful and devoid of lighting...

[paul_haakonsen · 4/10 · 3 February 2020]

All I knew about "3022" when I sat down to watch it was that it was a sci-fi movie of sorts. I had no idea what the story was about, nor whom was in it. Normally, I am not overly keen on sci-fi movies, but was given the chance to watch it, so I did.

First I have to say that "3022" is not an overly interesting movie. In fact, it was sort of boring and very uneventful. More than once was I tempted to get up and go watch something else. But I endured and stuck with it to the end - to the boring, unsatisfactory end.

For a sci-fi movie then this 2019 movie from writer Ryan Binaco and director John Suits was mundane, generic and downright boring. There was simply way too little of any interest going on to keep the movie going and keep it interesting.

I will say, though, that the acting performances were good, despite of the actors and actresses having very little to work with. Most memorable in the movie was Angus Macfadyen, without a doubt, given his strong performance.

The movie is dark, a bit too dark if you ask me. It makes no sense that there was so little illumination about a space station. Sure, it sets the mood for a thriller or a horror movie, but it makes absolutely no common sense whatsoever.

I endured "3022" to the end, and can honestly say that this is not a movie that I will be returning to watch a second time. My rating of the movie lands of a less than mediocre four out of ten stars.

Rediculous!

[gchans · 3/10 · 20 March 2020]

Typical cheap budget movie. There seems to be a real shortage of light bulbs in the future. Everything is very dark. Hard to make out what is happening. Weak plot. And worst of all everyone is a chain smoker! Really on a space ship in the future! Not bloody likely! Angy people constantly fighting and can't get along. Don't waste your time with this tripe!

Smoking in space?

[craigalank-36574 · 2/10 · 25 March 2020]

I gave this a 2 specifically because of the asinine use of cigarettes on a space station in the year 3022, by a medical doctor no less. Every writer who thinks that cigarette use makes characters more interesting or cooler should be fired. If that's the best they can do they are not creative enough to do their jobs.